HARD LOCK DOWN

There's a disturbing scene in the early part of the film World War Z (Marc Forster, 2013) in which a presidential decision results in the total obliteration of an American town infected by a killer virus. With no vaccine and no appropriate treatment dropping a bomb on the town was the only way to eradicate the virus and protect other communities from possible contagion. Real life scenarios would never condone such drastic action,  however, filmic accounts of ways to identify, contain and eradicate pandemic viruses does emphasize the demand for immediate action, even if that action requires individuals sacrifice certain freedoms for the good of all other community members.

The recent surge in the numbers of those (after a near elimination of the virus in Victoria) found to be Covid-19 positive in Melbourne and the distribution of over thirty clusters over many suburbs has resulted in a return to Stage three restrictions being reinstated in ten different postcodes and more recently the 'hard lock down' of nine Public Housing towers in another two postcodes.

Feelings of worthlessness and alienation already experienced by many living in Public Housing together with stigmatization and stereotyping of residents as 'no hopers, drug addicts, alcoholics' is exacerbated not only by the fact that these people are being blamed for spreading the disease but also by the fact that isolating them will only reinforce in their minds that they are unclean, unworthy and invisible. Indeed being locked in they will be more exposed to the virus that has already infected thirty people who have been in contact with hundreds of other residents. I don't know how many times it has to be emphasized if you have high density housing with people crowded into lifts and public areas, then the virus will spread. There is a lesson here for those who live in high-rise apartments in Melbourne to be vigilant and to all other Victorians who have lapsed into a complacency and a mind set in which they believe that the virus is not dangerous and not circulating.

On that point, containment and testing is totally necessary but I feel for those in Public Housing many of whom have mental health issues, are disabled, have comorbidity and English language issue will be traumatized by lock down. My concern is that these people already dealing with often debilitating conditions and limited status and finances to enjoy the activities of those better off, have to contend with feeling like they are in jail, since five hundred police have been deployed to ensure that they do not leave the towers for an initial five days. A 'them and us' mentality is also reinforced not only by cordoning off the nine towers, but spills into the lock down of the ten other postcodes also associated with people of low socioeconomic status and varying cultural groups.

New smoking legislation and more whinging

I wish the government would consider spending $100 million dollars on providing more public housing for the nearly two hundred thousand people on the seventeen year waiting list rather than spending it on an unnecessary postal plebisite to guage support for same-sex marriage when they already know there is strong support within the community for the proposal.

On the note of discrimination the new Tobacco law enacted on 2 August has meant that smokers can no longer smoke outside in the air where others are eating even though they were initially relegated to outside tables away from non-smokers eating indoors. Happily some establishments have decided not to discriminate against smokers and have placed signs on tables stating that no food will be served outside, enabling smokers to be able to meet socially with others. One wonders what new human rights will be eroded and where it will all end?

What if I started a campaign against dogs outside coffee shops? Richmond and in particular Bridge Road appears to be the doggie capital of Victoria. It's impossible to walk down the footpath without having to weave around dogs on leashes taking up most of the space and don't start me on the way owners treat their dogs like they are human. They sit on chairs and on owner's laps. Some bark loudly and attempt to fight with others and scratch their hair and dander into the air. I'm rather apprehensive of dogs and so the walk down Bridge Road can, at times feel like walking the gauntlet. It seems to me that it is potentially more dangerous walking past potentially aggressive dogs than to breathe in another's second hand smoke. But that's just one person's opinion.

I've already spoken in the past about having to travel in a crowded tram and tolerate the claustrophic air imbued with a mixture of perfume or the strong smell of after shave. I'm not the only person who finds it difficult to breathe under such circumstances. Should it be against the law to wear these substances in an enclosed space if it provides discomfort to others? I think I've managed to argue that there is always something that we could complain about but the non-smokers are a strong, conservative group that relies on health issues to support their argument and yet they are probably the greatest culprits when it comes to polluting the environment (use of large cars, excessive consumption of air-conditioning, heating and food).

And talking about public transport. It was once a law that no food was to be consumed in public vehicles, but now passengers must endure sitting next to those eating and drinking and the culprits often leave food packaging - paper bags, plastic and drink containers (cans and take away coffee cups) on the seats or floor of the tram when they get off. As a vegetarian I find it particularly offensive having to sit next to someone eating a meat product. And the list goes on. What if we all complained to the government, what if we all - not just smokers, had to curb our passions and human right to choose? The mind boggles.